I think the big failure of formula e was the way they failed to promote pit replaceable battery packs.
It is debatable how much motorsport tech trickles down to improve our daily motor tech, I think this was much more the case early on and now days the sport tech is so rarefied it does not help us much. But mass market electric cars are still fairly new and I think that sporting competitiveness can do a lot of good here. The big one that was missed were easy to replace generic battery packs.
But I also think the biggest failure in f1 was the removal of refueling, so what do I know?
footnote: in nascar it was the five bold lugnuts, the pit stops with five bolt lugnuts were absolutely gorgeous compared to the single bolt they use now... and we wept.
For me, the failure of Fe is all the races are run on street courses with few high speed turns and no elevation change through the lap. That, and they sound like an NBA games with more tire squeaking noise than the propulsion system sounds.
I'm really looking forward to this weekend's F1 finale. Three drivers have a shot at the top three spots in the championship.
And if you think that OpenAI, Anthropic and others have all hijacked it to train their models, it's kind of crazy that these are only limitations applied to private persons or small companies, but don't touch big corps at all.
This whole thing pisses me off so much. I would be fine with an absolute anarchy in which copyright and patents no longer exist but these same dickheads have been terrorizing the entire planet with lawsuits and DRM for downloading Metallica CDs for the last 30 years and even now they don't actually want to reform the copyright system, just grant themselves a special exception because everything is supposed to unconditionally work in their favor regardless of circumstances.
Correct. This was initially being developed shortly after "Legacy but the failure of "Tomorrowland" canned the whole thing. Leto came on years later, offered to produce it and star in the film and brought the project back from the dead. This is basically his film, it doesn't exist without Leto as the lead
They were both budget brands with niche offerings. For most people, the source of the OS is immaterial. There's very little competitive advantage to selling a forked OS, and a rather large downside in terms of support costs.
I'm mostly happy with my GrapheneOS device - but it is absolutely not suitable for mass market.
> I'm mostly happy with my GrapheneOS device - but it is absolutely not suitable for mass market.
What makes you say that? I run GrapheneOS on a Pixel and had to go through the relative simple flashing process, but if GOS came preinstalled on a device anybody familiar with Android (or even iOS) would be able to use it. Compatibility with Android apps is great too.
"Find My Device" means the location of your device is constantly sent to and stored on someone else's computer (the "cloud"), and it is something that shouldn't exist unless that someone else's computer happens to be yours.
I am not ordering anything. I was merely explaining that "Find My Phone" is not a feature -- it is an anti-feature that enables surveillance by a third party. The lack of such an anti-feature should be viewed as an advantage of Graphene, rather than a disadvantage.
Most banking apps work on GrapheneOS. Around 10% ban using any alternate OS, but a small subset of those specifically permit GrapheneOS now in addition to Google certified devices with the stock OS.
It's nearly the same permission model as Android 16 beyond having Storage Scopes and Contact Scopes as easy to use alternatives with fine-grained control along with Sensors and Network toggles. It's otherwise the same.
If you're talking about the exploit protection features with toggles, that's not part of the permission model and the defaults don't break any apps without serious bugs. Apps with memory corruption bugs can be broken by the defaults, which only requires turning on the compatibility toggle for the app. People don't need to understand the finer grained settings.
The default 4x5 icon grid has the same icon sizes as the stock Pixel OS, which can't be adjusted there either.
The vast majority of issues people have with GrapheneOS are issues with Android and Android apps which are not specific to GrapheneOS.
What is the issue with the permission model. It's basically the AOSP permission model. The changes made by GrapheneOS is the user-facing toggle for the INTERNET permission, and the sensors permission.
If people do not want to interface with those features, they can simply skip them, and the permission model will be the exact same as it is on Android.
GrapheneOS is partnered with a major Android OEM and working towards some of their future devices meeting our requirements and providing official GrapheneOS support. It won't be the main operating system, but it will be an officially supported option. Their current devices don't meet our requirements, but they're working towards meeting those for future devices.
reply